The argument against it was too strong not to have prevailed without any one man's contribution to it; and the Senate was not so strongly inclined to support President Cleveland as to give a two-thirds majority to a measure, unless it seemed clearly for the public interest.
Hoar analyzes the Senate's reluctance to support President Cleveland's treaty due to public interest concerns.
Share
More from George F. Hoar
It would have been a worse civil war than that of the Rebellion, because the country would have been divided not by sections, but by parties.
What was said helped to arouse public attention, and the masses of the people--always pure and incorruptible--set themselves earnestly and successfully to reform the abuses.
This Treaty would make us a vulgar, common place empire, controlling subject races and vassal states, in which one class must forever rule and other classes forever obey.
There has probably never been a man in our history upon whom so few people looked with indifference.
Other voices in this conversation
